From: "Bob George" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Robert Menschel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [...]
> > 1) Yes, sa-learn DOES deal with these emails, and does so
> > exceedingly well here. I call them "bayes fodder", since those random
> > words are teaching bayes that emails with those random words are spam.
>
> Just to avoid confusion, you're saying that AFTER TRAINING, bayes works
quite
> well for those messages, right? The key is feeding any messages that DO
slip
> through into sa-learn as spam UNTIL you get those results, no?
>
> The "random words" question seems to come up frequently, and TRAINED bayes
> seems to be a good answer.
>
> > 2) I then augment bayes with the following rules:
> > [...]
>
> "Add-on" rules do seem to help get bayes there quicker!
After watching the Bayes filter "learn" to auto white list spam when
first installed I disabled the auto white list feature and explicitly
generated lists if ham and spam. When the Bayes filter kicked in after
it had accumulated a couple hundred ham and spam messages the results
were dramatic. Before then it was somewhat discouraging. I do believe
I shall leave automatic learning and white listing turned off because
it seems to false entirely too often for my tastes. (The concept also
seems a little strange. If it already knows it's spam then train it
that the message is spam. I'd rather teach it with the new spam that
is not found than simply rack up higher scores by training it that
material it knows is spam is indeed spam. What am I missing here?)
{^_^} Joanne
